Why Is Tamil Nadu Opposing the Implementation of NEP & the Imposition of Hindi?

Why Is Tamil Nadu Opposing the Implementation of NEP & the Imposition of Hindi?

KAKALI DAS

Should Hindi be mandatory for children in Tamil Nadu, and does the NEP require its inclusion in the curriculum? Is it justified for the central government to withhold funds from Tamil Nadu for not adopting the language policy? Should learning Hindi be essential for all Indians, regardless of their native language, and what are the implications of making it compulsory in Tamil Nadu’s education system? Is it fair to link central funding to the implementation of Hindi education policies?

The entire debate was sparked when the central government announced its decision to withhold ₹2,152 crore in funds allocated for Tamil Nadu’s SamagraShiksha scheme, citing the state’s refusal to implement the NEP 2020 as the reason for not disbursing the money.

RelatedPosts

Blue Origin’s All-Female Spaceflight: A Historic Win for Women or a Luxury Trip for the Rich?

April 23, 2025

Climate Emergency: 2025 Declared International Year of Glaciers

April 22, 2025

Al Gore Calls for Unified Action at The Climate Reality Project’s ‘The Reality Tour’ in New Delhi

April 22, 2025

Union Minister for Education, Dharmendra Pradhan, has firmly stated that Tamil Nadu will not receive the withheld funds unless its government fully accepts the NEP 2020. He has accused the DMK-led administration of opposing the policy for political reasons and questioned why Tamil Nadu remains the only state resisting its implementation while the rest of the country has adopted it.

Prioritizing the welfare of school children, Tamil Nadu Finance Minister ThangamThennarasu announced on March 14 that the State government has allocated funds from its own treasury to cover the ₹2,152 crore in funds owed by the Centre under the SamagraShiksha scheme.

Let’s understand why this money is important. The Tamil Nadu Education Minister has stated that 40 lakh students and 32,000 teachers rely on these funds for their salaries. Currently, the Tamil Nadu government is having to use its own resources to cover these expenses, which is impacting the right to education. Therefore, the minister argues, the central government must step in and provide the necessary support.

Why is Tamil Nadu refusing the implementation of the NEP? The state is opposed to enforcing the NEP in government-funded schools. The core disagreement between the state and the central government lies in the three-language formula recommended by the NEP.

The central government argues that the policy will boost employment opportunities for young people, not just within the state but also outside it. However, Tamil Nadu views this as an effort to impose Hindi on its population.

Tamil Nadu has traditionally adhered to a two-language policy, which includes Tamil and English. The state has a long-standing history of opposing the imposition of Hindi. This stance is often described as ‘linguistic chauvinism’—a deep pride in the local language and a strong desire to protect it.

We have observed similar sentiments in other states like Karnataka, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh, Telangana, and Odisha, where people are deeply committed to preserving their native language. Each of these states fiercely protects their language, with Maharashtra also being particularly protective of its own.

For some background on the two-language policy—it was first proposed by Annadurai in 1968 in the then Madras Assembly and later implemented. Since then, the Tamil Nadu state government has consistently followed this policy, limiting language instruction to Tamil and English. Hindi has only been taught in CBSE schools within the state.

The three-language policy, an initiative of the central government, was first proposed in 1964 and adopted during Indira Gandhi’s tenure as Prime Minister. It was later reaffirmed during Rajiv Gandhi’s leadership and again in 1992 under Narasimha Rao’s Congress government, with the aim of promoting linguistic diversity and national unity.

The three-language formula has been retained and reaffirmed once again in the National Education Policy (NEP) introduced in 2020.

Under the new policy, state governments and schools have the flexibility to choose three languages, with at least two being Indian languages. However, the policy does not require one of them to be Hindi. For example, the chosen languages could be Tamil and Kannada or Malayalam.

Union Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, on March 2^nd, stated that the NEP 2020 does not impose Hindi on any state. He further argued that the Tamil Nadu government’s opposition was politically motivated, especially considering that Tamil Nadu is heading into elections in about a year’s time.

The minister has clarified that the NEP encourages mother-tongue-based education and emphasizes the importance of all languages—Hindi, Tamil, Assamese, Odia, Punjabi, and others.

Why is the Tamil Nadu government, led by Chief Minister MK Stalin, resisting, even though the policy does not explicitly mandate Hindi? He has written a letter to the Prime Minister requesting the release of funds, stating that the DMK will not allow the imposition of Hindi under any circumstances—whether it means losing power, facing imprisonment, enduring torture, or even sacrificing their lives. This stance certainly appears a bit dramatic.

On March 5^th, MK Stalin posted on Twitter, stating that rather than installing the Sengol in Parliament as a symbolic gesture of Tamil pride, the central government should remove Hindi from its offices in Tamil Nadu. He argued that instead of offering hollow praise, Tamil should be made an official language on par with Hindi, and more funds should be allocated to Tamil rather than continuing to prioritise the “dead” language of Sanskrit.

Journalist Karan Thapar had a conversation with P.T. Rajan, the Minister for Information Technology in the Tamil Nadu government. Rajan clarified that they are not prohibiting schools from teaching three languages; schools are free to do so if they choose. However, the state government will not mandate it and will continue with its two-language policy, as it has been successful for over 70 years and has yielded excellent results.

The Information Technology Minister also argued that this policy applies only to state-funded schools under the state board, and that Tamil Nadu views it as a backdoor attempt to impose Hindi. He emphasized that the concept of a unifying national language should be rejected. Meanwhile, MK Stalin has argued that many North Indian languages have been overshadowed by Hindi, with native languages no longer being spoken as Hindi has dominated the region. While there is merit to his argument, some says that he is exaggerating the situation.

Tamil Nadu has consistently opposed the dominance of Hindi on the national stage, arguing that English serves just as well for communication both within India and internationally. As a result, the state prefers English over Hindi.

Although the policy itself doesn’t explicitly mandate anything, various government officials have made statements that have fuelled the debate. For instance, MK Stalin responded to a Hindi Divas event, where Home Minister Amit Shah had posted on social media, saying, “The one language marking India’s identity globally is Hindi.” In response, Stalin remarked, “This is India, not Hindia.”

BJP Tamil Nadu chief Annamalai has stated that the three-language policy is the need of the hour and has even launched a signature campaign in its support. He also pointed out that since the BJP came to power, several trains in Tamil Nadu have been given Tamil names, emphasizing that the party strongly upholds Tamil pride.

What about the other southern states? Andhra Pradesh’s Chief Minister, Chandrababu Naidu, believes that learning multiple languages is beneficial. He has even promoted the teaching of five languages in all universities across Andhra Pradesh. It’s worth noting that Naidu’s party, the TDP, is an ally of the BJP.

In Karnataka, there has always been resistance to Hindi, with the Kannada Rakshana Vedike, a group dedicated to protecting the language, actively working to promote Kannada. They are known for blackening signs and insisting that everything be written in Kannada. However, there has been no official response from them regarding the NEP.

An Interesting aspect of this debate is that education falls under what is known as the Concurrent List. In India’s legal framework, some matters are regulated solely by the central government, which falls under the Central List or Union List. Others are regulated solely by the state government, falling under the State List. Education, however, is one of those areas that is governed by both the central and state governments, making it part of the Concurrent List.

Originally, before 1976, education was a state subject. However, after 1976, it was moved to the Concurrent List, giving the central government the authority to legislate on education policies and curriculum for universities and institutions.

Currently, institutions like IITs, IIMs, AIIMS, CBSE boards, the UGC etc. are all regulated by the central government. Meanwhile, state governments oversee areas such as state education, the mid-day meal scheme, teacher recruitment, infrastructure development, state board syllabi, and state universities.

Legally, states have the option to push back against the NEP, as they are not compelled to follow it. It falls within a state’s right to decide what aspects of the policy they choose to implement.

While Dharmendra Pradhan claimed that all states have implemented the NEP, this is an overstatement. Some opposition-ruled states, such as Kerala and West Bengal, have either delayed its implementation or expressed reluctance. Meanwhile, states like Karnataka have raised concerns about certain aspects of the policy, indicating they have reservations.

Since education falls under the Concurrent List, states like Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, and Kerala have the right to oppose central policies and implement their own if they choose. However, is it fair for the central government to withhold funds meant for education, insisting that the state must adopt the policy in its entirety to receive those funds?

The real question is: Do you believe everyone in India should learn Hindi as a unifying force, or would it make us homogeneous, essentially making everyone the same?

There is a theory that France once eliminated many of its smaller languages to establish French as the sole unifying language, and this has created a strong sense of national unity.

Do you think Hindi could have the same effect in India, or would it erase the distinctiveness and vibrancy of each state? Would it diminish the rich history, culture, and literature tied to those regional languages, as they would no longer be taught or valued?

Mahabahu.com is an Online Magazine with collection of premium Assamese and English articles and posts with cultural base and modern thinking.  You can send your articles to editor@mahabahu.com / editor@mahabahoo.com(For Assamese article, Unicode font is necessary) Images from different sources.